Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion

[Poi E]

Feudal titles are for fuckwits. Dead fuckwits.

 

[Pickman's model]

Feudal titles are for fuckwits. Dead fuckwits.

duke ellington? count basie?

 

[brogdale]

Lord Grenfell

Think I'd prefer to see Lord complicit in murderous class-war negligence and blind-eye turning on of behalf of rich donor scum....cunt.

 

[Pickman's model]

Lord Grenfell

i think you'll find that julian pascoe francis st leger grenfell is lord grenfell

 

[GarveyLives]

No arrests to date, but now ...:

London Fire Brigade officials interviewed under caution by police over disaster

 

[Dogsauce]

Would be shit if members of the fire brigade who would have been acting in good faith end up in jail while wilfully negligent politicians and construction firms escape blame.

 

[GarveyLives]

A harrowing report:

Doreen Lawrence says Grenfell tragedy was linked to racism

 

[Lurdan]

The report into phase 1 of the Grenfell inquiry (events on the night of the fire) is due to be published tomorrow (Wednesday). Yesterday core participants were given access ahead of that but the reports findings were supposed to be embargoed until it is published.

The Chairman believes that it is very important that those most affected by the fire have the opportunity to consider the key findings in the report before it is made public. In particular, he wishes to avoid a situation in which Bereaved, Survivors and Resident core participants learn of any of the contents of the report as a consequence of media coverage arising from premature and unauthorised disclosure.

The Daily Telegraph has chosen to break the embargo and make some of the findings their lead story today. (Paywalled - archived here). [ETA: link broken - here's another]. Other papers have followed suit.

Grenfell inquiry finds fire brigade 'gravely' ill-prepared for blaze - The Guardian

The stories so far have led on criticisms of the Fire Brigade, but also state that the refurbishment was carried out in breach of safety regulations, and that the principal cause of the fire spread was the ACM (Aluminium Composite) panels the building was clad with. Without seeing the actual report it's impossible to judge whether this is a fair summary of its findings.

Back on the 15th October the Inquiry published initial details of phase 2 of the inquiry which is due to begin hearings on January 27th next year. It is to be split into eight modules looking at the various issues that phase 2 will cover. (Current list of issues - PDF file).

Module 1 - The Primary Refurbishment (Overview And Cladding)
Module 2 - Cladding Products – Testing/Certification, Product Marketing/Promotion
Module 3 - Complaints And Communication With Residents; Management Of Building, Compliance Rro 2005, Fire Risk Assessment; Active And Passive Fire Safety Measures Internal To Building.
Module 4 - Aftermath
Module 5 - Firefighting
Module 6 - Government
Module 7 - Experts
Module 8 - Evidence Relating To The Deceased

 

[agricola]

Another triumph for the British Press.

 

[Pickman's model]

Another triumph for the British Press.

You cannot hope to bribe or twist
(thank God!) the British journalist
But seeing what they'll do
Unbribed there's no occasion to

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Why is phase 1 dealing with the response to the fire, surely phase 1 should look at the causes of the fire and phase 2 with the response to the fire?

 

[teqniq]

If you blame the first responders at the beginning, that is what will stick in people's minds rather than the corrupt system that allowed this to happen in the first place.

 

[teuchter]

It looks like the finger is being pointed at the command and the systems they had in place, rather than the first responders themselves.

 

[teqniq]

You may have arrived at that conclusion but I pretty much guarantee that a fair few people casually perusing the headlines over breakfast will not. Moreover it is irresponsible of major news outlets to publish parts of the report when it was supposed to be embargoed. I wonder why they chose to do that?

 

[Lurdan]

The reasons given, at the start of the Inquiry, for the division into two phases were :

I propose to conduct the inquiry in two phases. In the first phase I shall investigate the development of the fire itself, where and how it started, how it spread from its original seat to other parts of the building and the chain of events that unfolded during the course of the hours before it was finally extinguished. I shall also be looking into the response of the emergency services and the evacuation of residents.

It is necessary to address these questions first for two reasons. The first is because there is an urgent need to find out what aspects of the building's design and construction played a significant role in enabling the disaster to occur. That is important, because if there are similar defects in other high-rise buildings, steps must be taken quickly to ensure that those who live in them are kept safe.

The second is because until we understand the chain of events in some detail, it will not be possible to pinpoint the critical decisions that had a bearing on the exposure of the building to the risk of an uncontrollable fire.

I don't think anyone who followed the evidence at the hearings will be very surprised that there are criticisms of aspects of the Fire Brigade's response. But how far the reporting today reflects what the report actually says remains to be seen.

 

[teuchter]

You may have arrived at that conclusion but I pretty much guarantee that a fair few people casually perusing the headlines over breakfast will not. Moreover it is irresponsible of major news outlets to publish parts of the report when it was supposed to be embargoes. I wonder why they chose to do that?

To sell papers I guess. But I agree they should not have.

 

[Chilli.s]

Of course the fire service are going to get blamed, no mention of the cuts to their budget being at all a contributing factor, oh no.

 

[Libertad]

Of course the fire service are going to get blamed, no mention of the cuts to their budget being at all a contributing factor, oh no.

And who was responsible for making those cuts? That cunt Johnson.

 

[Chilli.s]

And who was responsible for making those cuts? That cunt Johnson.

Fire service an easy target, won't be any names, just poor policy in place at the time bla bla bla lessons learned bla bla...

 

[Chilli.s]

It boils my piss... those poor firemen doing their level best to save people, some probably traumatised by the event, risking it all. And now this indignity. Yet those with the real responsibility to oversee this situation and ensure that it was a safe place to live will just walk away.

 

[cupid_stunt]

The fire service were not the main problem, but clearly mistakes were made, and the comment from the LFB’s commissioner Dany Cotton that she "wouldn’t change anything the brigade did on the night" was moronic.

Clearly there's no blame on the front-line fire fighters, but those in charge need to accept mistakes were made.

But, the real focus needs to be on the cunts that made the tower so unsafe in the first place.

 

[Chilli.s]

Mistakes will be made when cuts have happened. So the cuts are the cause. Not the overstretched, less trained, less equipped.

 

[polly]

They seem to be complaining that the Fire Brigade told everyone to stay put, but that would have been the right advice if the building had been fire proofed in the way it should, and not wrapped in flammable plastic. I thought this was all accepted that the time, that the Fire Brigade changed their advice and told people to gtfo once they realised the fire wasn't being contained properly.

Absolute cunt move, obviously, to try to shift the blame onto the Fire Brigade. Doesn't seem to be going down well with any of the local groups.

 

[Chilli.s]

They seem to be complaining that the Fire Brigade told everyone to stay put, but that would have been the right advice if the building had been fire proofed in the way it should, and not wrapped in flammable plastic. I thought this was all accepted that the time, that the Fire Brigade changed their advice and told people to gtfo once they realised the fire wasn't being contained properly.

Absolute cunt move, obviously, to try to shift the blame onto the Fire Brigade. Doesn't seem to be going down well with any of the local groups.

Absolutely, nail head hit. That's what happened.

 

[cupid_stunt]

They seem to be complaining that the Fire Brigade told everyone to stay put, but that would have been the right advice if the building had been fire proofed in the way it should, and not wrapped in flammable plastic. I thought this was all accepted that the time, that the Fire Brigade changed their advice and told people to gtfo once they realised the fire wasn't being contained properly.

Absolute cunt move, obviously, to try to shift the blame onto the Fire Brigade. Doesn't seem to be going down well with any of the local groups.

Basically yes.

But, it was clear the fire hadn't been contained and was well out of control, long before the advice was changed.

 

[teuchter]

The report has also specifically said that the cladding did not meet building regulations.

So it's clear that blame is also being attributed to those who designed and built it.

Anything to do with the fire brigade becomes emotive because the public perception is of firefighters being brave and heroic, which they are to some extent (although working on a building site is actually more dangerous). It doesn't seem right to use that to dismiss criticisms of how the response worked at a systematic level. There will always be fires that develop in unexpected ways. It doesn't seem controversial to say that the fire brigade's systems of command need to allow for default advice to be adjusted rapidly if it becomes clear that the course of a fire is proceeding in an abnormal way.

 

[polly]

Perhaps it's our media then that is giving prominence to the blame on the fire service, rather than the report? I've read the bit about the cladding but it's not in any of the headlines that I've seen. I mean, yes, the Fire Brigade should be trained to respond to specific situations that they know might arise, but the giant blame finger really needs to point at the people who knowingly made money from forcing poor people to live in unsafe conditions, rather than those who were ill prepared to rescue those people. That's not to say that the LFB shouldn't learn from this, of course.

 

[teuchter]

Perhaps it's our media then that is giving prominence to the blame on the fire service, rather than the report?

I don't know because I've not read the report yet, but I expect that yes certain sections of the media at least will write stories that get people wound up.

I was just at the dentist and reading the subtitles to the 'victoria derbyshire' programme on the TV screen fixed to the ceiling. Their report actually seemed to stress that the blame was mainly aimed at the command structures, but then it got to the end bit where they read out viewer comments and they were all people going on about how dare you blame our brave firefighters etc etc.

 

[Pickman's model]

I don't know because I've not read the report yet, but I expect that yes certain sections of the media at least will write stories that get people wound up.

I was just at the dentist and reading the subtitles to the 'victoria derbyshire' programme on the TV screen fixed to the ceiling. Their report actually seemed to stress that the blame was mainly aimed at the command structures, but then it got to the end bit where they read out viewer comments and they were all people going on about how dare you blame our brave firefighters etc etc.

everything struck out superfluous

 

[polly]

I don't know because I've not read the report yet, but I expect that yes certain sections of the media at least will write stories that get people wound up.

I was just at the dentist and reading the subtitles to the 'victoria derbyshire' programme on the TV screen fixed to the ceiling. Their report actually seemed to stress that the blame was mainly aimed at the command structures, but then it got to the end bit where they read out viewer comments and they were all people going on about how dare you blame our brave firefighters etc etc.

Yes, I am acquainted with our press I hadn't seen or heard a headline that mentioned anything but the LFB being to blame until I googled just now.

I think it's extremely rich of anyone to cast the first (or largest) stone at a public service that has been cut to the bone (under BJ as mayor alone, it lost 10 fire stations, 300 firefighters and 30 engines), rather than the council or management company, who ignored repeated warnings about exactly this event, or the property wankers who made the building so unsafe in the first place. The reality is: chronically underfunded public service lacks up-to-the-minute training in tackling the various possible fallouts from building management companies and councils failing to adequately fire proof their buildings in the pursuit of every possible drop of profit. I'm not a headline writer

And firefighters will take any criticism of the service personally, and people will do so on their behalf, which I think is understandable - it's pretty emotive, rescuing people from fires and being long term underpaid for doing so.